Among those who reject the Biblical record of God’s action in creating everything, including all living things, the process of chemical evolution from atoms to the first cell is usually explained something like this: elements reacted with each other spontaneously forming simple molecules. These simple molecules continued to react forming larger and more complex molecules such as the nucleotide building…
The Adventist faith will not be itself if it accepts theistic evolution. The active God who created by the word of His mouth, who communicated through the prophets, who lived among us, died in our place, was resurrected and ascended to minister for us, who will return the second time to gather us to Himself, who will resurrect the dead and re-create the new earth, and who will finally destroy sin, cannot be worshiped if He does not exist. This article was originally published on Perspective Digest, v. 18/4.
In the contemporary scientific academy, as is well-known, the word “creationism” derisively refers to a worldview irrevocably rejected by the secular scientific community in general. What may be less well-known is that there are contrastive worldviews generally subsumed under the term “creationism.”
As Christians, we believe that God created the Earth and us, and has entrusted us to care for the planet and each other. What are some practical things that we can do at home to care for the Earth’s environment?
Creation and Sabbath provide key rationale for the continued necessity of earth care. In the biblical theology of conservation, we cannot dismiss care for animals and care for the environment by reasoning that the earth will eventually be “burned up” (2 Pet. 3:10). All living creatures are co-inhabitants on the earth, and as they also depend on its ecosystems for survival, the Bible holds humankind responsible for the preservation of the earth and the care of all living creatures.
It is reasonable to assert that Christianity was an essential component of the culture in which modern science developed because it provided a more encouraging worldview for the investigation of nature than did alternative belief systems.
From the trillions, yes trillions, of non-human cells that live in our bodies cooperating with us in various ways that keep us healthy and happy, down to the molecular machines that keep each cell running all the way up to the cooperation between plants and animals that keep the animals fed, the plants pollinated and any number of other cooperative relationships between organisms, the real question is, “Who designed the marvelous plans we see brought to life all around us?”
We are warned in Romans 1:20 that those who observe God’s handiwork yet do not believe “are without excuse.” Before the artist-Creator we must stand in awe.
If we had perfect knowledge, our science and our theology would never be in conflict because the same God who reveals Himself through Scripture has also revealed Himself through creation, and God is not in conflict with Himself. Thus, when we see conflict between our best theology and our best science, this is merely an indication of our lack of complete understanding.
In a "land of plenty" it is not easy to be motivated about being fugal with the earth's abundant treasures. Yet, when God brought the children of Israel to the "Promised Land," He carefully instructed them on good ecology.
Creation in the prophetic literature of the Old Testament is employed as a constant literary and theological reference which connects to a historical past, motivates the interpretation of the present, and moves towards a perspective for the future by means of a continuous contextualization of the topic via the triad creation–de-creation–recreation.
Environmental ethics now defends the inclusion of large communities of animals, plants, rivers, lakes, mountains, and valleys, referred to as ecosystems, “biomes,” or “the natural environment.”
Environmental ethics expands the circle of moral concern beyond human beings to include at the very least some “higher” mammals with whom we share important morally relevant characteristics. Environmental ethics explores why nonhuman life should count morally. By contrast, with rare exceptions, Western ethics is predominately anthropocentric.
Are humans a part of the environment, or only stewards of it? Are humans merely "in" nature, or are they also "of" nature? What does it mean to "preserve" the environment?
Do Christians have a legitimate interest in environmentalism, or might it be a distraction from the real work of the gospel?
A review of the book, Beginnings: Are Science and Scripture Partners in the Search for Origins? Published in Origins n. 60.
How do dinosaurs fit into a biblical worldview?
Is God real? Is the Bible true? What about all those amazing stories in the Bible? Specifically, what about the Genesis stories? Did God really create the world and all that is in it in a literal week? Did that Creation occur only some 10,000 years ago? How could all these biblical accounts be true when so many brilliant scientists advocate otherwise?
How should the Bible and natural science be related, explained, or studied? At least two positions seem possible. On the one hand, there are those who hold that a conservative understanding of the Bible and the findings of science cannot be harmonized. On the other, there are those who believe that conclusions drawn from the two disciplines can be harmonized to fit into one overall view of the world.
Whenever religion and science have a dispute about some question of fact, religion always loses. So goes a common belief. The implication is that religion should never make any factual claims, as it has no contact with reality. For some religions, such an assertion is irrelevant, as these religions do not make any claims about the physical universe. But for biblical Christianity, such an assertion would be fatal.
